MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136756411 · doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsp123

Brief Report: Maternal Kangaroo Care for Neonatal Pain Relief: A Systematic Narrative Review

2009· review· en· W2136756411 on OpenAlexaff
Fay Warnock, Thaíla Corrêa Castral, Rollin Brant, M. Sekilian, Adriana Moraes Leite, Scott Owens, Carmen Gracinda Silvan Scochi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Psychology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MedicineMEDLINENarrative reviewPain reliefPhysical therapyPsychologyPediatricsIntensive care medicineNursingAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To appraise critically and to synthesize existing Maternal Kangaroo Care (MKC) intervention studies for neonatal procedural pain. METHODS: Four electronic databases were systematically searched and eligible studies selected by two independent reviewers. Of 93 abstracts, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Findings were extracted and methodology assessed based on best-synthesis methodology. RESULTS: There is evidence that MKC can significantly reduce pain from a single pain procedure in full-term infants and stable preterm infants (>26 weeks GA). All 12 MKC studies reported significant reduction in pain behavior but measures of heart rate varied. However, current approaches to data analysis cannot tell us of the magnitude of treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies need to clearly define their intervention, provide a guiding framework, explain their study methods and analyses and report effect sizes. This will help strengthen validity of the intervention and support recommendations for clinical application.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric PsychologySame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207